Observational, Retrospective Evaluation of a New Nurse-Initiated Emergency Department Pain Management Protocol.

BACKGROUND: Triage nurses are important in pain management and in early relief of pain among patients admitted to the emergency department (ED). AIMS: To assess a new nurse-initiated pain management protocol, without the requirement for medical prescription, wich was implemented in October 2016 for patients with moderate or severe pain in the ED. It allows the administration of oral acetaminophen and oral oxycodone chlorydrate during the first evaluation of the patient by a nurse and eliminates the use of codeine or tramadol. METHODS: We conducted a comparative, single-center, retrospective study that looked at the outcomes of a new nursing protocol for patients aged ≥16 years with moderate to severe pain. The primary outcome was the percentage of increase of analgesics delivered by the nurse. RESULTS: A total of 756 patients were included: 377 before and 379 after protocol implementation. Oral analgesic use on admission increased from 44.3% to 57.8% (p < .001), and from 50.2% to 76.6% among patients with severe pain (p < .001). Strong opioid analgesic administration increased from 2.1% to 41.2%. This increase was also observed among those with moderate pain (1.4% to 13.3%; p < .001) and those with severe pain (2.6% to 62.6%; p < .001). Analgesic prescriptions added by the clinician decreased from 28.6% to 21.4% (p = .028). CONCLUSIONS: We observed an increase in analgesic administration after the implementation of a new nurse-initiated pain treatment protocol, especially an increase in oral opioid analgesics, for patients with moderate to severe pain.

Expeditious exclusion of acute coronary syndrome diagnosis by combined measurements of copeptin, high-sensitivity troponin, and GRACE score.

BACKGROUND: High-sensitivity troponin (HS-TnT) combined with copeptin have been proposed to expedite the diagnostic exclusion of acute myocardial infarction. The Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) has been validated and recommended by the European Society of Cardiology as a prognostic score in the management of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) without ST-segment elevation (non-ST+) on the electrocardiogram. Our study examined whether a low GRACE score (<108) combined with negative HS-TnT (<14 ng/L) and copeptin (<14 pmol/L) reliably exclude the diagnosis of non-ST+ ACS, including non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and unstable angina. METHODS: This observational, prospective study included patients presenting with chest pain lasting <6 hours, consistent with non-ST+ ACS. Blood was collected early for measurements of copeptin and HS-TnT. The negative predictive value of combined copeptin, HS-TnT, and GRACE score was calculated in the diagnosis of non-ST+ ACS. The thresholds of positivity were 14 ng/L for HS-TnT, 14 pmol/L for copeptin and 108 for the GRACE score. RESULTS: Among 247 patients retained in the analysis, the diagnosis of ACS was made in 50 (20.4%), including 39 non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and 11 unstable angina. The negative predictive value of combined HS-TnT, copeptin and GRACE score was 99%. CONCLUSION: A negative copeptin associated with a negative HS-TnT in a patient presenting with a low GRACE score expedited the diagnostic exclusion of non-ST+ ACS.

Could reasons for admission help to screen unhealthy alcohol use in emergency departments? A multicenter French study.

Background: Many patients admitted to general emergency departments (EDs) have a pattern of drinking that could lead to future alcohol-related complications. However, it is often difficult to screen these patients in the context of emergency. The aim of this study is to analyze whether reasons for admission could help to screen patients who have an unhealthy alcohol use. Method: Patients were recruited among six public hospital ED in France, between 2012 and 2014. During a one-month period in each hospital, anonymous questionnaires including sociodemographic questions, AUDIT-C and RAPS4-QF were administered to each patients visiting the ED. The reason for admission of each patient was noted at the end of their questionnaire by the ED practitioner. Results: Ten thousand Four hundred twenty-one patients were included in the analysis. Patients who came to the ED for injuries and mental disorders were more likely to report unhealthy alcohol use than non-harmful use or no use. Among male patients under 65 years old admitted to the ED for a mental disorder, 24.2% drank more than four drinks (40 g ethanol) in typical day at least four time a week in the last 12 months. Among these patients, 79.7% reported daily or almost daily heavy episodic drinking (HED, 60 g ethanol), and all were positive on the RAPS4-QF. Conclusion: This study highlights that unhealthy alcohol use is frequent among ED patients and particularly among those who come for injuries or mental disorders. Men under 65 years old with a mental disorder require special attention because of their increased prevalence of daily or almost daily HED.

Comparison between the WHO and NIAAA criteria for binge drinking on drinking features and alcohol-related aftermaths: Results from a cross-sectional study among eight emergency wards in France.

BACKGROUND: Binge drinking (BD) consists of heavy episodic alcohol use. Whereas the World Health Organization (WHO) defines BD as 60g of alcohol or more per occasion, the National Institute on Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse (NIAAA) conceives BD as drinking 70g (men) or 56g (women) in less than two hours. We compared the subjects delineated by each definition. METHODS: Eight-center cross-sectional study among 11,695 subjects hospitalized in emergency wards. Participants completed the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test - Consumption (AUDIT-C), CAGE and Rapid Alcohol Problem Screen 4 (RAPS4-QF) questionnaires. The WHO criteria were investigated using the RAPS4-QF. Independent questions assessed the NIAAA criteria. The main medical admission motive was noted. The characteristics of subjects meeting respectively: 1) the exclusive WHO criteria (BD1); 2) the NIAAA criteria (BD2); and 3) no BD criteria (noBD) were compared using multinomial regression analyses. Binary age- and gender-adjusted regression analyses directly compared BD1 and BD2. Subjects with at least four drinking occasions per week were excluded from the analyses, to withdrawn regular heavy drinking. RESULTS: Compared to BD1, BD2 subjects were more frequently males (OR=1.67 [1.39-2.0]), single (aOR=1.64 [1.36-1.98]) and unemployed (aOR=1.57 [1.27-1.90]). BD2 reported significantly more drinks per occasion, and higher heavy drinking frequencies. Previous alcohol-related remarks from family (aOR=3.00 [2.53-3.56]), ever drinking on waking-up (aOR=2.05 [1.37-2.72]), and admission for psychiatric motive (aOR=2.27 [1.68-3.07]) were more frequent among BD2 subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to WHO criteria, NIAAA criteria for BD delineate subjects with more concerning drinking patterns and alcohol aftermaths.